MEPs seek specific data on side-effects from biofuel

A cross-party group of MEPs is urging the European Commission to distinguish clearly between different types of biofuel when assessing their contribution to climate-change targets. They want account taken of the indirect effects on carbon dioxide emissions, as well as the direct effects.

The Commission is hoping to present a proposal next week on how to reflect the environmental side-effects of growing crops for biofuel when counting the contribution of these fuels to lowering emissions. The important factor in this calculation is indirect land-use change (ILUC) – where the use of arable land for crops for biofuel leads to cultivation of replacement crops on other types of land, thereby limiting the overall reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions.

Twelve MEPs from five political groups – the European People’s Party, the Socialists & Democrats, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, the Greens/European Free Alliance, and the Green United Left/Nordic Green Left – want the Commission to propose ILUC factors “specific to each feedstock”.

The MEPs include Jo Leinen, a German centre-left MEP who chairs the European Parliament’s environment committee, and Claude Turmes, a Luxembourgeois Green MEP, as well as the co-ordinators on the environment committee for the S&D, ALDE and Green groups.

Emission levels

An impact assessment prepared by the Commission has already indicated that, if the ILUC effect is taken into account, biofuel from palm oil, soybean and rapeseed produces more greenhouse-gas emissions than fossil fuels.

The MEPs are insistent that assigning individual values to different crops is crucial – but they are aware that this is only one of four approaches being considered by the Commission.

None of the other approaches would address the issue of ILUC, the MEPs claim in a letter to the commissioners responsible. But they are concerned that the Commission may be preparing to sidestep this issue by opting for another approach that would make greater demands on biofuel to outperform fossil fuels in terms of cutting greenhouse-gas emissions.

They believe that Günther Oettinger, the European commissioner for energy, and Connie Hedegaard, the European commissioner for climate action, favour that method.

The MEPs argue that the result would be “even more concentration of growing biofuel crops on arable land”, with the added disadvantage that ignoring the crop-specific ILUC factor would also undermine incentives to invest in developing newer forms of biofuels that will not compete with food production.

“More sophisticated second- and third-generation biofuels will be more expensive than environmentally-harmful first-generation [biofuel],” their letter says.

Any failure to address the underlying problems of the sustainability of biofuel policy would “fail to drive the markets towards good biofuels with low ILUC risks that we need in our fight against climate change in the future”, the MEPs say.

The European Biodiesel Board said in a statement: “In our view, ILUC factors would penalise the biofuel industry upfront without bringing any sustainability benefits.

“In other words, it would not create any incentive to improve agricultural practices, as operators involved in the biodiesel supply chain do not have direct control over land-use policies implemented in countries situated outside the EU.”